What's new

‘We are not terrorists’

Myanmar: The Invention of Rohingya Extremists
www.thestateless.com/2017/10/myanmar-the-invention-of-rohingya-extremists.html
Rohingya-refugees-walking-to-a-camp-in-Coxs-Bazar-October-2-2017-Cathal-McNaughton-Reuters.jpg

Rohingya refugees walking to a camp in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, October 2, 2017. Cathal McNaughton/Reuters
By Joseph Allchin,
The New York Review of Books

It is not hard to get guns on the Chittagong littoral. Or at least, that’s what my interviewee was telling me underneath a canopy of trees outside his house in the fishing village of Shamlapur, in southern Bangladesh. His men stood round carrying his cigarettes and laughing obediently at his quips.

Connections with both the police and underworld were what my acquaintance had, and what makes the world turn in this Wild West corner of Bangladesh, where smuggling is the primary source of income and power. He was reflecting on a new phenomenon in this region: the prospect that a tragically displaced people, the Rohingya, would produce an armed resistance movement to challenge their persecution by the military in their homeland, across the border in Myanmar.

On August 25, a rag-tag group of the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army, or ARSA, appeared out of the darkness armed mainly with sticks and machetes and stormed some thirty police posts, killing about a dozen Myanmar security personnel in Rakhine State (also known as Arakan State) in western Myanmar.


The Myanmar military responded with overwhelming force and brutality, reportedly killing and raping civilians indiscriminately and burning villages. Within a few weeks, under the pretext of “clearance operations” against a population it accuses of having immigrated illegally from Bangladesh and harboring extremists and terrorists, the military forced more than half a million Rohingya to flee across the border into Bangladesh, where they joined another half-million or so who have fled the apartheid-like conditions and periodic pogroms of recent years.

Myanmar’s government has faced numerous ethnic insurgent movements. For example, in the north of the country, the Kachin Independence Army is fighting a far better-equipped insurgency in the borderlands near China. Yet the Kachin people, who are often Christian, have faced no such comprehensive campaign of ethnic cleansing or accusations of being terrorists because of their faith.
The difference is that the Rohingya people are mostly Sunni Muslim. Myanmar’s military rulers have long sought to portray the Rohingya as a fifth column of dangerous Islamist extremists with links to al-Qaeda.

The demonization of this Muslim minority as “extremists” or “terrorists” has proved effective for nationalist politicians with Myanmar’s Buddhist majority. But this othering of the Rohingya now risks dangerous secondary effects.
Chiefly, that the government’s conjuring of the specter of a jihadist insurgency may prove self-fulfilling, with an embittered, radicalized Rohingya diaspora forced over the border at bayonet point into Bangladesh, where a coterie of Islamist groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir are using the Rohingya cause to whip up popular sentiment for their own political purposes.

The portrayal of the Rohingyas as an Islamist terrorist menace has deep roots. A full decade before Myanmar’s transition to democracy, the Myanmar intelligence community saw an opportunity in the “global war on terror.” On October 10, 2002, the same day that the US Senate approved George W. Bush’s ill-fated war on Iraq on the bogus grounds of Saddam Hussein’s purported connections to al-Qaeda and possession of weapons of mass destruction, the State Department received a cable from its mission in Yangon that relayed a rare example of intelligence-sharing from their Myanmar counterparts.
This was a very unusual instance of cooperation since, at the time, Myanmar was under strict sanctions and the country at large was cut off from the international community.

The intelligence Myanmar provided claimed that two now-defunct groups, the Rohingya Solidarity Organization and the Arakan Rohingya National Organization, had met and received training from al-Qaeda operatives; the diplomatic cable also reported that these Rohingya groups were trying to establish connections with other Burmese ethnic insurgent groups based on the country’s border with Thailand.

The US embassy believed that the Myanmar generals wanted “to bolster relations with the United States by getting credit for cooperation on the [counter terror] front,” and also to tarnish the reputation of other ethnic insurgent groups because of an association with groups seeking support from al-Qaeda. Most ethnic insurgent groups had an affinity with pro-democracy activists because of their shared struggle against the military. Historically, Myanmar’s armed forces have used divide-and-rule tactics to weaken their opponents and disenfranchised minorities.

But there was no evidence that any Rohingya group had successfully developed connections with al-Qaeda for operations in Myanmar. One of the purported Rohingya acquaintances of Osama Bin Laden, an activist named Salim Ullah, told me that when a Muslim picks up a gun in Myanmar, he is labeled a terrorist; when a Buddhist does so, he is making a cry for liberty. Prejudice against the Rohingya has become ingrained within a majority of the Buddhist population, including among many who have supported other ethnic armed groups.
Even many former pro-democracy campaigners have adopted the military’s labeling of the entire Rohingya population as terrorists.

The tension between the majority population and the Muslim minority has been further whipped up by Myanmar’s ultra-nationalist monks. This hostility has elicited a growing online response from foreign Islamists. Groups affiliated with al-Qaeda and other jihadist movements are now using the plight of the Rohingya to promote their own narratives of Muslim persecution.

Until recently, most of this propaganda saw the “liberation” of Arakan State in Myanmar, where most Rohingya Muslims traditionally live, as a notional aim, something to be done once neighboring Bangladesh had been “conquered” and a caliphate installed there. But now, groups like al-Qaeda seem to have more directly taken up the cause of the Rohingya. In mid-September, an al-Qaeda communiqué called for “all mujahid brothers in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and the Philippines to set out for Burma [Myanmar] to help their Muslim brothers.”

There is no sign yet that the Rohingya insurgent group has allied itself with outside jihadist groups. Indeed, ARSA’s decision in March to drop its Arabic name in favor of a more secular-sounding English one suggests that ARSA has not been subsumed by any transnational Islamist extremist organization.

The group’s charismatic leader, Ata Ullah, does have connections in both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and was brought up in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, believed to be where the al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri is being sheltered. But as is evident from ARSA’s modest capabilities and lack of weaponry, efforts by Ullah to solicit support from groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Taliban have so far not borne fruit.

However, with the huge swell of anger over the clearance operations and vast exodus of Rohingya civilians, this could change. Already, Egyptian militants have bombed Myanmar’s embassy in Cairo.
In Bangladesh, the country’s counterterrorism chief, Monirul Islam, echoes what my contact in Shamlapur told me: “Guns are available and [are] smuggled into Bangladesh from Myanmar or from India.”
Islam claims that an AK-47 clone can be bought for a little over $1,000 on the black market; a pistol might cost just a few hundred dollars. Efforts to source weapons can open up militant groups to surveillance by local intelligence agencies; in Bangladesh, such movements generally rely on patronage from powerful quarters to avoid such attention.


Bangladeshi Islamists have been working hard to exploit the Rohingya’s plight, portraying the crisis as a grand, prophesied conflict between the forces of belief and unbelief. ARSA itself has also sought to gain popular support in Bangladesh for its insurrection. Indeed, a broad consensus of support for the Rohingya has developed, where previously they were dismissed as exploitable interlopers. Bangladesh’s prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, has won plaudits for the compassion she has expressed—although her move appears a political necessity given the loud voice with which Islamists have jumped on the cause.

One purported ARSA commander recently argued that the Myanmar military had “been torturing us day by day so we had no alternative. That’s why we acted [on August 25] … We knew this would happen.” That message of inevitable conflict and existential struggle chimes with many Rohingya people.
Even the women I interviewed in southern Bangladesh said, without prompting, that they would fight if they could; they had nothing left. A month-long ceasefire declared by ARSA will expire on October 10; it is likely that the group will resume its low-intensity attacks. When that happens, any Rohingya villagers still left in Myanmar can expect further vicious reprisals from the military.

Just as the Bush administration’s misguided war on terror helped to foster Islamist extremism all over the world, the Myanmar generals’ intentional exaggeration of largely imagined relations between Rohingya insurgents and international jihadist groups may result in similar unwanted consequences.

While the Myanmar military originally sought to divide Rohingya insurgents from potential allies among other anti-government, pro-democracy ethnic groups by playing on historic resentments, its policy may well end up driving Rohingya militants, whether in form of ARSA or still more frightening expressions of rage, into the arms of the real extremists.
 
Are there Rohingya terrorists operating in N. Rakhine State, with international support?
image.jpeg

Armed Myanmar border police walk by homes during a patrol in Maungni village, Maungdaw township, in western Myanmar's Rakhine state, Oct. 15, 2016. (AFP)
By Maung Zarni
October 3, 2017
Joseph Allchin's solid analysis of Rohingya militarist group has just destroyed Bertil Linter's rubbish on the same subject.
"There is no sign yet that the Rohingya insurgent group has allied itself with outside jihadist groups.
Indeed, ARSA’s decision in March to drop its Arabic name in favor of a more secular-sounding English one suggests that ARSA has not been subsumed by any transnational Islamist extremist organization.
The group’s charismatic leader, Ata Ullah, does have connections in both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and was brought up in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, believed to be where the al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri is being sheltered. But as is evident from ARSA’s modest capabilities and lack of weaponry, efforts by Ullah to solicit support from groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Taliban have so far not borne fruit."
Myanmar: The Invention of Rohingya Extremists
By Joseph Allchin
The New York Review of Books
October 2, 2017
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/10/02/myanmar-the-invention-of-rohingya-extremists/
ZARNI'S REMARK:
I have long concluded that Bertil Lintner, treated falsely as the most credible journalist on my country's affairs, has no professional integrity when it comes to the issues related to Muslims and Rohingyas. (You can publish 10 books on the subject, and still don't have your finger on a country's pulse).
He told my close friends from Mandalay that he knew that Myanmar Military would use anti-Muslim racism in Burma targeting Rohingyas and Muslims in general, in 2011, about 1 year before June 2012 bout of violence broke out.

But Lintner never penned a single op-ed to alert the world of what he said he knew: a state's premeditated attempt at racially and religiously motivated campaign of terror, for strategic ends.
Instead he started changing even what he wrote about Rohingyas - particularly attacking Rohingyas' identity.

Worse still, he has been pumping out alarmist essays tailored to the paranoid "war-on-terror" intelligence and policy circles, blowing Rohingyas' alleged ties to the international terrorism.
His protege Aung Zaw at Irrawaddy uses Lintner's wild exaggerations - packaged in minute, but useless details about terrorist connections designed to impress the readers and establish his authority on the subject.

Well, Joseph Allchin, whose expertise and research on the subject of terrorism and extremist groups in Bangladesh is simply unmatched by Linter's speculations and assertions, just published this solid piece.
Asia Times website has become the main platform from which this alarmist "Rohingyas as potential jihadists" message is aired. I don't know who runs the site, what their editorial slants are or what their links and agendas. It is deeply troubling that the issue of international criminality is distorted as "terrorist" concern. The oppressed are of concern to nation-states and governments only if they are framed as remotely threatening to stability and order. The oppression itself is rendered of secondary concern.

These discourses of jihadism, international terrorism are not only anti-Muslim racist but they colour the world's public opinion in a bad way.

Paranoia that characterises exploitative, predatory and repressive States and their intelligence agencies is a serious cancer that has spread since George W. Bush's 9/11 response. Entire faith-based communities are viewed through this lens of paranoia, and bigotry-based profiling is carried out quietly but routinely.
Here is couple of fear-mongering pieces by various writers who operate within this more-or-less "security" framework.

Derek Mitchell, my long-time acquaintance from Washington, and former US Ambassador to Burma also succumbed to this policy cancer.

As a matter of fact, former Pentagon political appointee, Mitchell was known within Washington circle to have functioned more like a lackey of Myanmar's then widely- - and falsely- touted 'reformist' President ex-General Thein Sein, lobbying Obama Administration, rather than behaving like an American diplomat in Rangoon.
See my brief note on Mitchell's distorted view of Rohingya "terrorism":
https://www.transcend.org/tms/2017/...ll-must-not-educate-the-west-about-rohingyas/
1) The truth behind Myanmar’s Rohingya insurgency
While the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army claims to be fighting an ethno-nationalist struggle, its leaders and extremist group links point towards a wider regional agenda
By Bertil Lintner
Asia Times
September 20, 2017
http://www.atimes.com/article/truth-behind-myanmars-rohingya-insurgency/
2) Rohingyas’ long history of jihadism must be acknowledged
The international community's understanding of the current crisis has failed to factor in the long history of Islamic extremism in Rakhine State
By Brahma Chellaney
Asia Times
September 30, 2017
http://www.atimes.com/article/rohingyas-long-history-jihadism-must-acknowledged/
3) Rohingya insurgency heralds wider war in Myanmar
The Harakah al Yaqin insurgent group, with leadership in Saudi Arabia and ties to Bangladeshi extremist groups, threatens to bring global jihad to Myanmar
By Anthony Davis
Asia Times
February 21, 2017
http://www.atimes.com/article/rohingya-insurgency-heralds-wider-war-myanmar/
4) Myanmar’s Rohingya Conflict: Foreign Jihadi Brewing
By Jasminder Singh, Muhammad Haziq Bin Jani
RSIS
October 18, 2016
https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-public...ars-rohingya-conflict-foreign-jihadi-brewing/
http://www.rohingyablogger.com/2017/10/are-there-rohingya-terrorists-operating.html
 
Ready to fight again: The homeless Rohingya still backing Myanmar insurgency
Reuters
Published at 09:37 AM October 06, 2017
WEB_Myanmar_border-690x450.jpg

A Rohingya man carrying his belongings approaches the Bangladesh-Myanmar border in Bandarban, an area under Cox's Bazar authority, Bangladesh |Reuters
ARSA, which emerged in 2016, says it is fighting for the rights of the Rohingya
For 28-year-old Rohingya Muslim shopkeeper Mohammed Rashid, the evening phone call from organisers of the fledgling insurgent movement came as a surprise.
“Be ready,” was the message.

A few hours later, after meeting in the darkness in an open field, he was one of 150 men who attacked a Myanmar Border Guard Police post armed with swords, homemade explosives and a few handguns. At the end of a short battle, half a dozen men he had grown up with in his village were dead.

“We had no training, no weapons,” said Rashid, from the Buthidaung area of Myanmar’s Rakhine state, who had joined the group just two months earlier.

Accounts from some of those, like Rashid, who took part in attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) on dozens of police posts early on August 25 paint a picture of a rag-tag band of hopeless, angry villagers, who were promised AK-47 rifles but ended up fighting with sticks and knives.

Hundreds joined as recently as June, according to the accounts, and membership meant little more than a knife and messages from leaders on the popular mobile messaging app Whatsapp.

Reuters interviewed half a dozen fighters and members of the group now sheltering in Bangladesh, as well as dozens of others among the more than half a million Rohingya refugees who have fled across the border to escape a Myanmar army counteroffensive that the United Nations has branded ethnic cleansing.

ARSA, which emerged in 2016, says in press releases and video messages from its leader, Ata Ullah, that it is fighting for the rights of the Rohingya, a stateless Muslim minority that has long complained of persecution in mainly Buddhist Myanmar.

Myanmar says ARSA is a ruthless Islamist extremist movement that wants to create an Islamic republic in northern Rakhine.

Despite the massive suffering inflicted on their communities in the weeks since the August attacks, most of the fighters now stuck in dirt-poor camps said they were determined to continue their fight and some refugees voiced support for the insurgency.

Other refugees Reuters spoke to criticised the insurgents for bringing more misery upon them.

Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s spokesman, Zaw Htay, said ARSA had killed many Muslims who had cooperated with the authorities and so “people have felt threatened and terrorised” into supporting it. He added that Myanmar’s intelligence showed that religious scholars were prominent in recruiting followers.

ARSA denies killing civilians, and did not respond to a request for comment this week.

Analysts say the violence could galvanise ARSA members and supporters huddled in the refugee camps and among those Rohingya still in Myanmar, as people feel they have even less to lose.

“A militancy like this finds fertile ground because of the desperation of the community,” said Richard Horsey, a Yangon-based analyst and former U.N. official. “They are willing to take suicidal steps because they don’t see any other choice.”

Transnational Islamist groups could also try to exploit the desperation in the camps to radicalise people, Horsey added. Al Qaeda last month called for support for the Rohingya.
Homemade weapons and Whatsapp
Reuters could not independently verify the individual insurgents’ stories, but there were broad similarities in all of their accounts.

One fighter, 35-year-old Kamal Hussain from a village in Rathedaung in Myanmar’s Rakhine state, said he joined ARSA when a religious teacher stood in his village square in June, during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, and implored a crowd of hundreds to fight.

“He said we have no choice but to attack Myanmar because our brothers and sisters are being killed day by day. I think everyone joined that day,” Hussain said, as he sat under a tarpaulin in a Bangladesh refugee camp. “We should attack again and again. I would go back to fight if I had the chance.”

Unlike longer-serving fighters, most new joiners had little or no training or contact with the group’s leaders, who communicated using Whatsapp and delivered rudimentary homemade explosives ahead of the assaults.

A third fighter, his account supported by comments from two elders from his village interviewed separately, said he and about 60 men from Myin Hlut signed up three months ago.

The 26-year-old, who asked not to be named because he feared arrest by Bangladeshi authorities, said he was among 200 men who attacked another police checkpost in the early hours of Aug. 25.

“We had only knives and sticks, no guns,” he said. “They promised us AK-47s but we got nothing. The explosives didn’t work. We had two of them for the whole group, but when we threw them nothing happened.”

About 40 fighters were killed, he said, but added that he would do it again if called on.

“I still support ARSA,” he said. “If my leaders call me to go again and fight, I will go back.”

According to two village-level commanders, there were Whatsapp groups restricted to leaders and others to members.

Bigger groups, administered from overseas, were used to build broader community support for ARSA and the Rohingya cause.

On his phone, Shoket Ullah, an uncle of the 26-year-old fighter, scrolled through messages posted in the Whatsapp group “ARSA.G1”, administered through a Saudi phone number, where ARSA press releases, videos of alleged Myanmar military violence and messages of support for Rohingyas were shared.

Another Whatsapp group on Ullah’s phone, “Rohingya Desh Arakan”, is administered by someone using a number from Malaysia. Tens of thousands of Rohingya live in both Saudi Arabia and Malaysia.
Local backing
Rohingya anger at Myanmar has long existed, but this is the first serious armed resistance in decades.

In the crowded Bangladeshi camps, several refugees voice support for ARSA.

“I am disappointed and regret what happened but this was pre-planned by the Myanmar government,” said Shafi Rahman, a 45-year-old Burmese teacher whose village was burned to the ground the day after the attacks. “If ARSA didn’t attack, they would have done this to us anyway.”

Several refugees said some people had begun to sell cattle, vegetables and rice to raise funds for ARSA.

Not everyone was supportive, however. When Kamal Hussain, the fighter, argued that ARSA needed to keep fighting, his neighbours in the camp shouted him down.

“We have lost everything. Violence is not the answer,” shouted one elderly man, as muddy water spilled into the tent he now calls home.

It is not obvious how fighters would regroup and rebuild after so many have fled across the border or disappeared.

Three of the fighters who spoke to Reuters said they had been surprised by the ferocity of the Myanmar military’s response, and within weeks commanders had told their men to put down their weapons and abandon their villages.

Several said Whatsapp groups where regional and field commanders from ARSA, which before a rebranding this year called itself al-Yakin, or “Faith Movement”, would post updates had gone quiet.

“People who blame this on al-Yakin need to realise my people had to flee in 1978 and in the 1990s when there was no ARSA,” said one of the two village-level commanders, who grew up in Bangladesh after his family fled an earlier outbreak of violence, but returned to Myanmar in the 1990s.

“We should continue to attack. Even women can join.”

http://www.dhakatribune.com/world/s...ss-rohingya-still-backing-myanmar-insurgency/
 
Bangladesh Islamists call on government to arm Rohingyas
SAM Staff, October 7, 2017
rohingya_in_world.jpg

Thousands of Islamist hardliners marched in Bangladesh’s port city of Chittagong Friday (Oct 6)calling for the government to arm Rohingya Muslim refugees fleeing a crackdown in Myanmar’s troubled Rakhine state.

More than half a million Rohingya have fled to Bangladesh since attacks by militants belonging to the Muslim minority on Myanmar police posts sparked brutal reprisals by security forces.

The refugees accuse Myanmar’s army, flanked by mobs of ethnic Rakhine, of slaughtering them and burning their villages in a campaign which the United Nations says amounts to “ethnic cleansing”.

Myanmar’s military has blamed the unrest on the Rohingya.

Up to 15,000 people joined the demonstrations in Bangladesh’s second largest city, police said, organised by hardline Islamist group Hefazat-e-Islam to protest against the killings of the Rohingya.

“We demanded a halt to the genocide of the Rohingya,” Hefazat spokesman Azizul Hoque Islamabadi told AFP.

“We have also asked the government to train and arm the Rohingya so that they can liberate their homeland,” he said.

Communities in Chittagong share close cultural, religious and linguistic ties with the Rohingya, and images on social media purportedly showing abuses against the Muslim minority in mainly Buddhist Myanmar have aroused strong sympathy in Bangladesh.

Islamist parties, including Hefazat, have staged several demonstrations over the issue in recent weeks and some firebrand leaders have called on the government to go to war with Myanmar to liberate Rakhine for the persecuted Rohingya.

Experts said Bangladeshi Islamist extremist groups could exploit the situation and forge closer ties with Rohingya militants.

The plight of the Rohingya, a Muslim minority who are reviled and denied citizenship in Myanmar, has roused anger across the Islamic world, with protests held in Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia.

The influx has also put Bangladesh under immense strain, with the South Asian country already hosting at least 300,000 Rohingya refugees in squalid camps along its border with Myanmar before the latest surge in arrivals.
http://southasianmonitor.com/2017/10/07/bangladesh-islamists-call-government-arm-rohingyas/
 
11:25 AM, October 07, 2017 / LAST MODIFIED: 11:34 AM, October 07, 2017
Rohingya insurgents open to peace move
But Myanmar govt ceasefire ending
rohingya_crisis_11.jpg

Young Rohingya Muslim refugees walk under the rain at Balukhali refugee camp in Bangladesh's Ukhia district on October 6, 2017. Photo: FRED DUFOUR/AFP
Reuters, Yangon
Rohingya insurgents said on Saturday they are ready to respond to any peace move by the Myanmar government but a one-month ceasefire they declared to enable the delivery of aid in violence-racked Rakhine State is about to end.
The Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) did not say what action it would take after the ceasefire ends at midnight on Monday but it was “determined to stop the tyranny and oppression” waged against the Rohingya people.

“If at any stage, the Burmese government is inclined to peace, then ARSA will welcome that inclination and reciprocate,” the group said in a statement.

Government spokesmen were not immediately available for comment.

When the ARSA announced its one-month ceasefire from Sept. 10, a government spokesman said: “We have no policy to negotiate with terrorists.”

The rebels launched coordinated attacks on about 30 security posts and an army camp on Aug. 25 with the help of hundreds of disaffected Rohingya villagers, many wielding sticks or machetes, killing about a dozen people.

In response, the military unleashed a sweeping offensive across the north of Rakhine State, driving more than half a million Rohingya villagers into Bangladesh in what the United Nations branded a textbook example of “ethnic cleansing”.

Myanmar rejects that. It says more than 500 people have been killed in the fighting, most of them “terrorists” who have been attacking civilians and torching villages.

The ability of the ARSA, which only surfaced in October last year, to mount any sort of challenge to the Myanmar army is not known but it does not appear to have been able to put up resistance to the military offensive unleashed in August.

Inevitably, there are doubts about how the insurgents can operate in areas where the military has driven out the civilian population, cutting the insurgents off from recruits, food, funds and information.

The ARSA accused the government of using murder, arson and rape as “tools of depopulation”.
NATIVE
The ARSA denies links to foreign Islamists.

In an interview with Reuters in March, ARSA leader Ata Ullah linked the creation of the group to communal violence between Buddhists and Muslims in Rakhine in 2012, when nearly 200 people were killed and 140,000, mostly Rohingya, displaced.

The group says it is fighting for the rights of the Rohingya, who have never been regarded as an indigenous minority in Myanmar and so have been denied citizenship under a law that links nationality to ethnicity.

The group repeated their demand that Rohingya be recognized as a “native indigenous” ethnic group, adding that all Rohingya people should be allowed “to return home safely with dignity ... to freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development”.

The Rohingya have long faced discrimination and repression in Rakhine State where bad blood between them and ethnic Rakhine Buddhists, stemming from violence by both sides, goes back generations.

The ARSA condemned the government for blocking humanitarian assistance in Rakhine and said it was willing to discuss ceasefires with international organizations so aid could be delivered.

Some 515,000 Rohingya have fled to Bangladesh but thousands remain in Rakhine.

Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi has faced scathing criticism for not doing more to stop the violence, although a military-drafted constitution gives her no power over the security forces.

Suu Kyi has condemned rights abuses and said Myanmar was ready to start a process agreed with Bangladesh in 1993 by which anyone verified as a refugee would be accepted back.

Many refugees fear they will not have the paperwork they believe Myanmar will demand to allow them back.
http://www.thedailystar.net/rohingya-crisis/rohingya-insurgents-open-peace-move-1472851
 
‘The frictions in the Rakhine state are less about Islamophobia than Rohingya-phobia’
Eminent Arakan historian Jacques P. Leider talks about the historical context of the Rohingya conflict
Sangeeta Barooah Pisharoty, October 1, 2017
jacs_p_leider.jpg

Jacques P. Leider. Credit: YouTube
Photographs of terrified Muslim men, women and children fleeing the Rakhine state of Myanmar to neighbouring Bangladesh in the last few weeks have made the global community take note of the Rohingya issue like never before.

A brutal crackdown by the Myanmar army on the Rohingya Muslim inhabited areas of Rakhine (formerly Arakan), in response to a reported attack in mid-August on the security posts by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), an armed group fighting for the rights of the Rohingyas, led to the exodus of more than 400,000 Rohingyas to refugee camps in Bangladesh.

While the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has called it a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”, heads of states of countries have accused the Myanmar government of committing “genocide”. The long silence of Mynamar’s State Counsellor and Nobel Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has also been questioned widely.

Media reports have failed to focus on the historical context of the conflict that treads back to the British colonial period. Revisiting the conflict may help find a possible solution to the crisis.

Jacques P. Leider is a well-known Arakan historian who has studied and written extensively about the complex Rohingya issue.

Leider, head of the Bangkok-based Ecole Françaised’ Extrême-Orient (EFEO), makes a deeper and nuanced assessment of the conflict which has simmered for decades before snowballing into a worrisome humanitarian crisis of South East Asia. In course of the interview, Leider categorically states, “The Western media fails to make a clear distinction between anti-Muslim violence in Myanmar’s urban centres and the radically different context of the Rakhine State.”
Below are excerpts from the interview:

You have been studying the socio-political history of the Arakan region of Myanmar for years. What led you to take a deep interest in it?
I studied history as well as Burmese language and civilisation in Paris. When I looked for a convenient topic for my MA research, my teacher oriented me towards the Burmese manuscripts collection at the French National Library. Somewhat surprisingly, I found a significant body of manuscripts on palm leaves and paper that dealt with Arakan in the early colonial period. The Buddhist kingdom of Mrauk U (1430-1785) became the focus of my doctoral research. Thereafter, I did research on many other topics, but Arakan’s history remained a constant element in my research.

This is a question you are often asked in media interviews which I will repeat here, simply because many people worldwide still do wonder who, after all, is a Rohingya; what is the origin of the term; is it an ethnic term; how old is this term; is it different from terms ‘Bengali’ and ‘Kalar’, also used to refer the Rohingyas in Myanmar?
‘Rohingya’ means ‘Arakanese’ in the East Bengali dialect spoken by people in North Arakan, ‘Rohang’ being a local phonological variant of ‘Roshang’, the region’s name in Bengali literature. To clarify the conundrum around the contested name ‘Rohingya’, one must step back in time and embed the issue to the regional history of Muslim migrations. Throughout the early modern period, Muslims from all over the Indian Ocean came to live in port cities of continental Buddhist Southeast Asia (Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, etc.), but the migration of ‘Indians’ (including Muslims, Hindus and people of other religions) during the colonial period increased their number considerably. This is a well-known story that does not need to be elaborated. In Arakan, it was overwhelmingly Chittagonianlabour, both seasonal and residential, that was attracted after the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869. Until the Second World War, the much older pre-colonial Muslim community of Arakan that was socially integrated, on the one hand, and the more recent migrant community of ‘Chittagonians’, on the other hand, remained distinctive groups. It was the group with recent migrant roots that became most politically active.

In the 1950s, both Arakan Muslim parliamentarians and Muslim insurgents (the ‘Mujahids’) shared the idea of an autonomous Muslim zone adopting the Sharia law and Urdu as an official language. Then, under the push of a younger generation, there were discussions to adopt a name of their own. This issue was politically contested as there were already many group divisions that weakened political cohesion. Various spellings such as Roewhengyas, Ruhangyas and others were proposed, all linked to an old, but as it seems, mainly orally used term ‘Rwangya’. The current spelling, Rohingya, is traceable in print since 1963.

In British administrative records, none of these terms had ever been used. For decades, the Muslims in Arakan were classified according to religion (Muslim), language (such as Bengali) and place of origins (predominantly Chittagong). The self-perception of different groups was only considered in the 1921 and 1931 census reports.

Moreover, the British classified people of Indian origins in Burma as ‘foreigners’. The question of how long these people had been living in the country was not put on record. ‘Foreigner’ is also the meaning of the very old word ‘Kalar’ that, in

Burmese literature and usage, refers to people from the West, these being mainly Indians, but also more specifically Indian Muslims. A frequently noted pejorative connotation in the use of this term depends largely on the context. It is much too common to say that it is only depreciative, as the Western media have systematically put it.

The term ‘Bengali’ to designate officially Muslims of North Arakan was used by the Burmese administration relatively late, starting in the late 1970s and 1980s. One should bear in mind that back in the 1950s, Pakistan recognised that a great number of Muslims in Burma had a claim on Pakistani citizenship and the term ‘Pakistanis’ was also used for people whom everybody identifies today as Rohingyas. Why were all these issues of belonging not clarified early on? In fact, a performing bureaucracy did only emerge very slowly. Burma’s Ministry of Immigration became functional ten years after independence. Today, these terms are politicised and contested. Each one has become a weapon in a media contest where a serene look at history would do away with some of the zealous energy that is driving the confrontation.

The Muslim-Buddhist friction in the Rakhine state particularly goes back since the British time. Will you throw some light on the history behind this friction. How much of it can be traced to the Rakhine Muslims’ secessionist or autonomy movement in the 1940s to create a Muslim zone and align it to the then East Pakistan? What relevance does that movement have on the extreme friction that we now see between the Rohingyas and the Rakhine Buddhists and the general perception of the Rohingyas in Yangon?

These are historically legitimate questions and they are politically relevant today. Yet, we lack in-depth studies to push for a necessary discussion. My answers are derived from a broad understanding of the context where I try to fit in the two ethno-religious communities. Unlike the mainstream media that singularise the case of the Rohingya Muslims in their relation to the state, I consider that, primarily, one cannot understand the politics of one group without observing the other. Both communities have always been internally divided about the choice of their political options (federalism or separatism/autonomy). They have only been united in their opposition to the unitary state and to each other.

The political dynamics of the Rohingya Muslim movement were driven by leaders from the north, mainly from the township of Maungdaw. In the 1950s, the Rohingyas were initially the movement of a social and economic elite (including Rakhine Muslim students in Rangoon) that did not include, and did not attempt, to represent all the Muslims of Arakan when it claimed an autonomous zone. North Arakan Muslim leaders had made clear to the British in 1947 and to the first Burmese government in 1948 that a political compromise with the Arakanese (or Rakhine) was not an option for them. Local Muslim leaders had greatly helped the British during the Second World War (by opposing the Japanese forward movement towards Bengal as against the Buddhists supporting the Japanese) and hoped, therefore, for their support to create a frontier zone with a specific status.

Putting afterwards their hope in Prime Minister U Nu’s government in the 1950s earned them a political reward in the early 1960s when the short-lived ‘Mayu Frontier Administration’ in North Arakan was created. In the 1970s, Rohingyas were mainly identified with Muslim rebel groups based on the (Myanmar) border with Bangladesh, desperate to obtain military support from Middle East countries. As Rohingya organisations in the diaspora failed to be accepted among the armed ethnic groups and the democratic anti-junta front during the 1980s and 1990s, their efforts to gain an international hearing became increasingly rooted in a human rights’ discourse. The descriptions of the dismal condition of Muslims in the Rakhine State, the misery of refugees driven into Bangladesh, the tragedy of boat people and what was described internationally as the systematic harassment of their community in Myanmar bore ample testimony to the discourse on the plight of the Rohingyas.

Today, with the backing of liberal democracies, Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member countries, UN organisations and human rights organisations that lobby for them, Rohingyas have many allies abroad and none in the country many of them call home.

In Myanmar, they fail to get recognition because their ethnic claim cannot be negotiated politically. So why the quasi-obsession with ethnic recognition by the state? Unlike in other countries, it is ethnic recognition that provides primordial constitutional legitimacy for political representation and citizenship. It is not the only criterion, but for the first generation Rohingyas, it was adamantly clear that only ethnic recognition would give them the necessary leverage for political claims. It should be clear from these explanations that the motives to support the Rohingya cause today draw on a vast array of different historical and legal arguments that do not form a single, unified body. There has been a general reluctance by international actors to get involved in the historical narratives that have animated impassionate debates between the Rakhine and Rohingya writers.

U Kyaw Min, an Arakanese parliamentarian and nationalist leader, stated in 1956 that the Arakanese had no problem with the Muslims, suggesting that a deal with the divided Muslims was always at hand. Yet over the decades, the communal frictions have increased because other, non-political issues impacted the Rakhine perspectives. For the Rohingyas, Muslim communal autonomy meant a fair deal that would see both communities get along politically and socially, but for the Rakhine, it meant the breaking apart of their motherland. Later on, it was the unequal demographic growth of the Muslim community that produced a latent anxiety among the Buddhists. Despite a general understanding that a part of the Arakan Muslims had deep roots in the country and that Rakhine history cannot be understood without its social and religious complications with Bengal from the past down to the present, a pervasive Rakhine narrative about Muslims in Arakan has viewed them as ‘guests’ who have betrayed the trust of their hosts by claiming territorial ownership. The claim of a distinctive ethnicity made by Rohingyas is, therefore, considered by them as fake. The frictions are less about Islamophobia than Rohingyaphobia.

Against this complex background, it is not possible to establish a straightforward link of causality between the late 1940s and today. Yet, it is the verbatim quotes of relatively simplistic statements made by both sides that have enjoyed national and international resonance in 2012 and fed back into the cycle of frictions.

There are other Muslims living in Myanmar even though much smaller in number than the Rohingyas. How much support do the Rohingyas have from these groups? Or, has the political term ‘Rohingya’ pushed these groups away from them?

There are various Muslim communities in the Rakhine state and there are a number of different Muslim communities across Myanmar – some of them possibly even older than the pre-colonial Muslim community in Rakhine. As an academic, I would use expressions such as “historically multi-layered and ethnically diverse communities”. Many are of various Indian ethno-linguistic origins, others are of Malay or Chinese Yunnan origins (like the Panthay in Mandalay), one group of so-called Burmese Muslims has more recently adopted the name ‘Pathi’ (a term found in the royal chronicles to designate a Muslim community) to underscore its antiquity.

By emphasising a distinctive ethnicity, the Rohingya leadership cut off the complex family of Rakhine Muslims from a long continuity of historical roots in Bengal and specifically south-east Bengal identities. For that reason, I have been talking about an effort on their behalf to de-Indianise themselves. The ethnic claim also deprived the Rohingyas of political solidarity with the other Muslim communities of Burma (Myanmar) that did neither raise ‘ethnic’ claims nor made expressly claims for political autonomy. One may recall that in an unfavorable political context that emerged since the 1960s, Indians in Burma became victims of nationalist politics. On top of local economic prejudice against Indians, the explicit political nature of the Rohingya project was perceived by many urban Muslims as toxic. There are still no public enquiries about this topic in Myanmar today, but anecdotal evidence would suggest that there is no substantial level of Muslim solidarity with the Rohingyas. It does not mean and I will not argue that it does not exist, but it’s at least not articulated. More soberly, urban Muslims in contemporary Myanmar urban centres, whatever their private feelings are, would have nothing to win to stand up for the Rohingya cause. Is the Rohingya project, therefore, to be called an ambition that has backfired on itself? To be true from a social and anthropological perspective, one has torecognise that during the last 50 years there has indeed been an ongoing melting process that has brought Muslims in Rakhine state closely together, forging a shared identity under the impact of state oppression and civic exclusion. There were never as many Muslims who identified themselves as Rohingyas than after 2012.

As you have always pointed out in your writings, the conflict in the Rakhine state has been traditionally triangular: the state vs the Rohingyas vs the Rakhine Buddhist. The narrative now, at least internationally, has become the state and Rakhine Buddhists vs the Rohingyas. Is it correct to include the voice of the Buddhist Rakhines in the extreme right wing 969 movement led by U. Wirathu or there is a separate voice that hasn’t found space in the international arena yet?

It is important to recall that the Rakhine themselves have struggled to be recognised as an ethnic group after independence and their ethnically denominated Rakhine state was only created in 1974. They are keen to stress their separate historical and cultural identity despite the religion, language and cultural traits they share with the majority Burmese (or Bamar). The 969 movement has picked up the Rakhine crisis issues to feed its own anti-Muslim discourse, but it was not bred in the Rakhine state. The Western media still fails to make a clear distinction between anti-Muslim violence in Myanmar’s urban centres and the radically different context of the Rakhine state. Even well-meaning academics tend to exemplify Islamophobia in Myanmar by pointing to the high number of Muslim IDPs (internally displaced people) in Rakhine state. At the same time, the political sentiments of Rakhine people are not integrated into international political analysis. On the other hand, the traditionally reclusive Rakhines have entirely failed to communicate a positive image of themselves to the rest of the world, to commit themselves publicly to tolerance and to invest in politically constructive ideas for the future. In a globalised world, it’s not enough to lay back and complain in confidential circles about the world that does not respect “us”.

Even though there was a huge exodus of Rohingyas to Bangladesh in 1978 following the violence – many of whom were repatriated in 1979 – the internationalisation of the Rohingya issue happened only after the 2012 violence. What changed then?

In terms of international media attention and support by the West and the Middle East, the aftermath of 2012 was an immense success for the Rohingya diaspora. One spin-off was the genocide narrative that severely impedes efforts of the current Myanmar administration to rebalance the discussion in their favour. For the Rohingyas in the country, it was a disaster. Rohingyas, despite their lack of full citizenship rights since 1982, had been granted voting rights and had participated in regional and national elections until 2010. But the suppression of their ‘white cards’ in 2015 by the national parliament cut them off from any form of political representation. This is ultimately not in the interest of the state. Put in Machiavellian terms, the army controlled the Rakhine state by playing the prejudice and interests of one community against those of the other one. This form of containing and at the same time, abusing the potential for communal frictions, also guaranteed state access to intelligence about the inner workings of these groups. The fast rise and the surprise of attacks of ARSA since October 2016 reflect an extraordinary intelligence failure on the side of the security forces.

There is a strong Rohingya diaspora voice which has been able to establish the issue as a humanitarian and Muslim victimhood issue. But you have said in your writings that “internationalisation has not opened new ground in the domestic political arena where both Muslims and Buddhists have been longing for peace.” Instead, you said, “It confirms some of the fears already had by the Buddhists, namely, the alleged threat of an international Muslim alliance.” If you can elaborate it a bit…

Your question relates to the arena of media fitness. When Myanmar opened up by the decision of the military elite in 2011, many people in the country regained hope about their political and economic future. But the hopes bear many contradictions, because the interests of the various ethnic and religious groups and the state are competing. The language, the terminologies, the mature thinking to address and negotiate publicly these contradictions and inherent conflicts had not yet been learnt. Public intellectuals and news editors were not present to orient the discussion and guide the public. Countrywide, educational infrastructure has been in a mess. What was “there” was the state of mind of the early 1960s and some of the memory of the 1950s as the country left a time-warp of several decades of isolation and party-line thinking. The international media that descended on Yangon after 2011 spoke a language that people were unable to assess rationally. Facebook became the foremost instrument of public discussion for the happy few with access to computers and 24-hour electricity, soon drunken with the newly-found freedom to criticise and wildly indulging in racist rampage when the conflict exploded in the Rakhine state. Trigger-happy rhetoric sustained a constant reiteration of “us the Buddhists” and the “rest of the world that does not understand Myanmar”. The Rohingya diaspora invested in sophisticated strategies of communication that neither the Myanmar state nor any of its ethnic constituencies have been able to cope with. Buddhist resentment was bound to increase.

Some countries have termed the Rohingya issue as genocide. Though, it is not for the first time the term has been used to define the extreme odds faced by the Rohingya Muslims. Yours writings point out that the term was first used in the 1951 charter of the Arakan Muslim Conference. In 1978, it was used by some Rakhine Muslim groups when violence led Rohingyas to flee to Bangladesh. However, post 2015, we are getting to hear it more often, and internationally. How do you see the use of this term, particularly by the international rights organisations and heads of states? In one of your articles on the issue, you said, “The accusation of the term hits hard on the credibility of the state.”

Genocide accusations resound very strongly and have an immediate impact on global audiences; they are perceived as an urgent call for action and possible intervention. Indictments of genocide should, therefore, be made on grounds that leave no doubt for interpretation. The accusation of a Rohingya genocide is still very much open for further discussion. This is not the only accusation of genocide that has been made within the region. Rakhine nationalists have alleged that the Burmese conquest of 1785 marked the beginning of a long-term effort to exterminate the Rakhine ethnic group and in the British census of 1901, the compiler hinted at the perspective of a disappearance of the Rakhine “race” due to Chittagonian immigration. Accusations have also been made about the genocide of the Chittagong Hill Tracts people in Bangladesh, especially during the Chittagong Hill Tracts war (1977-97). The charges of a “slow genocide” of the Rohingyas has been mostly made by people who discovered the Rohingya issue only in 2012. Questioning the use of the term ‘genocide’ does not mean that one intends to belittle mass atrocities and serious violations of human rights. It’s a fact that the Muslim population in the Rakhine state has been steadily growing despite massive emigration. In Maungdaw township, it has grown from 34% after the war to 92% (according to UNHCR sources), despite the fact that there has been a steady flow of people out of the region. The picture gets blurred when ‘genocide’ is used both as a rhetoric tool to express indignation about indiscriminate state oppression and as a description for an alleged state-led plan to exterminate a whole population.

You have spoken about the Myanmar government playing into the hands of the Rakhine nationalists by increasingly denying rights to the Muslims. Will you elaborate it a bit?

I am not sure I have put my argument clearly and if I didn’t, I should elaborate indeed. I do not mean to say that more the Muslims are harassed and flee, more the Rakhine community will have a reason to rejoice. Such an impression would be entirely wrong. Since the colonial period, the Muslims have established a reputation as hard-working people despite the general poverty of the population as a whole. There are many problematic issues to be addressed, such as population growth and women’s rights, but there’s a right for people to live where their families have lived now for decades. Only an ethno-political consensus of the two groups will make sure that there is a future for the people of the Rakhine state. I am talking about the progress and welfare of rural people at a basic level and initiatives that will lift people out of poverty. I am not talking about showcase government-led projects such as the port of Sittwaymodernised by India and the gas pipeline built by China and serving China’s thirst for natural resources. The bad news about the events in the Rakhine state have been ruining the reputation of the region and clearly lessen chances for diversified foreign investment.

Besides the economic aspect, there’s the political aspect. After the elections of 2015, the situation in the regional parliament of the Rakhine state became soon blocked by the appointment of a chief minister who belongs to the government party of Aung San Suu Kyi, the National League for Democracy. But it is the Arakan National Party that holds a majority in the regional parliament. The conclusion is this: pleasing or antagonising the Rakhine ethnics is not necessarily related to government policies towards the Muslims and vice-versa.

What is the way out? Aung San Syu Ki said that the state would soon begin verification process for the return of the Rohingyas. Do you think a fruitful political dialogue will possibly follow this?

There is not a single way out; there are rather many patient steps to be taken by the stakeholders and actors in the conflict sphere to improve the situation. While the immediate prospect looks bleak, not least because no one really knows what role the new group, ARSA, is going to play, one should not be blind to the fact that there have been no revenge killings and no riots in the rest of the Rakhine state during the last weeks. Most people in the country seem painfully aware that the current crisis may produce a dangerous international backlash. On the other hand, since 2013, many other ethnic groups that are hoping for peace and development and for international support as well, have grown desperate as the Rohingya lobby groups have appropriated a lot of the attention of international donors.

The near prospects will be dictated by the international involvement in the crisis. A repatriation effort will likely be engaged on the basis of the earlier agreement with Bangladesh and under international auspices. The government should try to apply, as it had promised, the recommendations of the Kofi Annan Advisory Commission report that make a lot of sense in terms of improving general livelihood in the region. True, none of those recommendations expressly address the issue of a political dialogue that you refer to. The international community does not seem to imagine anything like that either. It seems enthralled by the apparently unprecedented drama of another exodus that is still poorly understood. Sticking with their fascination for Aung San Suu Kyi, once a saint and de facto prisoner, a leader and a fallen angel today, the United States, the European Union and other interested parties fail to address and engage with some of the fundamental issues that we need to know more about, namely social and political drivers in the arch-conservative Muslim Rohingya society, transnational Rohingya dynamics, the relationship between the diaspora and Rohingyas in Myanmar as well as similarly structured issues relating to the social and political lives of the Rakhine community. What we know already is that the management of the Rakhine State and its people display a state failure that has extended over several decades. We also know that the state has failed to stand up for the protection and welfare of the people and has shown itself as a weak rather than as a potent force. Only a collective effort will pay off, the state alone will not be able to shoulder the entire burden. Dialogue is, no doubt, one among the important steps to be taken.
http://southasianmonitor.com/2017/10/01/frictions-rakhine-state-less-islamophobia-rohingya-phobia/
 
Rohingya crisis: Finding out the truth about Arsa militants
_98166598_f69920c6-c127-441d-ac97-5976ea98dd5e.jpg

Arsa has released videos featuring its leader Ata Ullah (centre) [YouTube]
By Jonathan Head
BBC News
October 11, 2017
If there was one thing almost everyone who has monitored Muslim Rohingya in Rakhine State agreed on, it was that sooner or later their plight would breed militant resistance to the authority of the state.

The attacks that started in the early hours of 25 August on around 30 police and army posts, triggering a ruthless military counter-attack which has driven more than half a million Rohingya into Bangladesh, showed that militancy, now led by a shadowy group calling itself the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (Arsa), has taken root.

But conversations with refugees and militants in Bangladesh also show that the group's strategy is still poorly-formed, and that it is not supported by all Rohingya.

Even the accounts given by the Myanmar security forces suggest that the 25 August attacks were mostly simple, almost suicidal charges by groups of men, most armed only with machetes and sharpened bamboo sticks.

One of the earliest and biggest attacks was on the police post in Alel Than Kyaw, a town on the coast south of Maungdaw.

Police Lt Aung Kyaw Moe later told a group of visiting journalists that they had advance warning of the attack and sheltered all local officials inside the barracks the night before.

At 04:00, he said two groups of around 500 men each stormed up from the beach.

They killed an immigration officer, whose house was close to the beach, but were easily driven off by police officers firing automatic weapons. Seventeen bodies were left behind.
_98230228_alelthankyaw-1040561.jpg

The village of Alel Than Kyaw was burnt down after the attack

This tallies with an account given to me by a Rohingya refugee in Bangladesh.
In a conversation about how he had been driven out of Rakhine state, he complained about the way the militants had tried to co-opt his village into joining the attacks in the days after 25 August.
They had helped themselves to cattle and goats, he said, telling the villagers they would be paid back when there was an independent Rohingya homeland.

And they gave new machetes to the young men, and told them to attack a nearby police station.
Arsa has plenty of weapons, he remembers them saying, and would be back to back them. Around 25 men from his community did as they were told, and a number of them were killed, he said.
There was no backup from armed militants.
I was able to meet a young man in his 20s, now in Bangladesh, who had joined Arsa four years before.

He described how the Arsa leader, Ata Ullah, had come to his village in 2013, telling them it was time to fight against the mistreatment of Rohingya.

He asked for five to 10 men from every community. A group was taken from his village to the forested hills, where they were trained in making crude bombs, using old car engine pistons.
Our informant said his village was encouraged by this, and began taking up food and other supplies to support the trainees. He eventually joined them.

They started patrolling the village, armed with sharpened bamboo sticks, and making sure everyone attended mosque. He says he never saw any guns.
'Getting the world's attention'

On 25 August he described hearing shooting, and seeing burning in the distance. The local Arsa commander - his "amir", he called him - arrived and told the men that the military was on its way and would attack them.

The men were told to launch their attack first - you are going to die anyway, he said, so die as martyrs for the cause.

Our informant said men of all ages armed themselves with knives and bamboo sticks, and charged the advancing soldiers, suffering many casualties - he named some of the dead.
After that they ran into the rice fields with their families, trying to make their way to Bangladesh. He said they were also harassed by Rakhine Buddhist men as they fled.
What was the point of such futile attacks, I asked him?

We wanted to get the world's attention, he said. We had been suffering so much, we thought it did not matter if we died.

He denied any links with international jihadist groups - we are fighting for our rights, and to try to get guns and ammunition from the Myanmar military, that's all, he said.

His and other accounts describe a movement with a small core of several hundred full-time militants, with perhaps a handful of foreigners among them, and many thousands of untrained and unarmed followers who joined the attacks only at the last minute.

On 25 August Ata Ullah, the Pakistan-born Rohingya man who started Arsa after an earlier wave of communal violence in Rakhine state in 2012, issued a video, flanked by hooded armed fighters.
He described the attacks that day as a defensive action, against what he called a genocide against the Rohingya.

He said his fighters had no choice but to launch the attacks against a Burmese army which had "surrounded and besieged us".
He appealed for international support. He described Arakan, another name for Rakhine state, as rightfully Rohingya land.

But he has insisted in subsequent statements that Arsa has no quarrel with other ethnic groups in Rakhine state.

There was no call for solidarity from other Muslims. He did not frame his struggle in terms of jihad, or as part of a global Islamist struggle
.

Ata Ullah is known to be suspicious of other Islamist groups, and does not at this stage appear to be asking them for help.

"Ata Ullah and his spokesmen have made it clear that they see themselves as an ethno-nationalist movement," says Anthony Davis, a Bangkok-based security analyst.
"They do not have any substantive links with international jihadism, IS [Islamic State group] or al- Qaeda. They see their struggle as regaining rights for Rohingya inside Rakhine State. They are neither separatists, nor jihadists."

However the military has successfully portrayed them as a foreign-backed conspiracy to the population of Myanmar, where the media has reported little of the massive Rohingya exodus to Bangladesh.
Ata Ullah's comment about Rakhine belonging to Rohingya was picked up by armed forces commander Gen Min Aung Hlaing early last month, when he warned that the military would never allow the country to lose any territory to what he called "extremist Bengali terrorists"
.

He described the military operation in Rakhine as addressing "unfinished business from 1942" - a reference to the time when it was a shifting frontline in the battles between British and Japanese forces.
'Rebalancing' population?
Rohingya and Rakhine Buddhists largely supported opposing sides in that war, and there were a number of massacres by militias on both sides, and large population movements.
This is when many Burmese and Rakhine nationalists believe the Rohingya population in Rakhine was artificially boosted by Bengali immigrants.

By driving half the Rohingya population out of Rakhine in just four weeks, the military "clearance operations" would appear to have rebalanced the population firmly back in favour of the non-Muslims.
That leaves questions over how Arsa will function, now that it has few or no bases left inside Rakhine State.

Launching attacks over the border will be much harder, and probably will not be tolerated by Bangladesh, which, though furious with the refugee crisis dumped on it by its neighbour, has always taken care to avoid conflict along its long, porous borders.

Our informant says he is still in regular contact with his "amir" and other Arsa leaders in Bangladesh, although he has had no contact with Ata Ullah.

He says he has no idea what the movement will do next. Most people we spoke to in the camps were aware of Arsa's presence. Some were clearly nervous even speaking quietly about the movement.
There are credible reports of numbers of informers being killed by Arsa in the months leading up to the August attacks.

But there is also widespread admiration among Rohingya for the only organisation to have fought back against the Myanmar military since the 1950s.

"A great deal now will depend on the attitude of Bangladesh," says Anthony Davis.
"They may choose to keep the border sealed. Or they may wish to exert some control over Arsa by supplying them with rudimentary assistance, rather than have radical Islamist groups, Bangladeshi or foreign, move in and fill a vacuum.

"There are examples elsewhere of military intelligence services using insurgent movements to exert cross-border pressure on a neighbour."
http://www.rohingyablogger.com/2017/10/rohingya-crisis-finding-out-truth-about.html
 
Who is Ata Ullah – the man at the heart of the Myanmar conflict?
Adil Sakhawat
Published at 01:33 AM October 20, 2017
2017-10-18-16-1-690x450.jpg

This is the third in a five-part series on the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) for which Dhaka Tribune’s Adil Sakhawat interviewed almost 20 ARSA members, including top leaders of the organisation. The series details the history, organisational structure, leadership, funding and affiliations of ARSA, and is a chronicle of the events leading up to the ARSA attack on Myanmar army outposts on August 24
In postwar Burma, now known as Myanmar, the rule of law has always been in flux. From democratic governments to autocratic military dictators to military-industrial oligarchies, the regime has always been rigid in its views on what it means to be Burmese.

Persecution of non-Bamar (majority) or non-Buddhists was always a constant. Sometime in the 1960s, a Rohingya family fled from Buthidaung township when the Burmese military attacked their village. The family fled to what was then known as East Pakistan. From there, they travelled by road to Jessore, and then to Kolkata in India.

From Kolkata, the family travelled all the way to Kashmir, from where they crossed the border into Pakistan, settling in a refugee camp in Karachi along with thousands of other Rohingya refugees.

A boy was born into this family in this refugee camp. Little did his family know that this boy, estranged from the land of his fathers, would one day march into that very land with fire and blood.

This boy, after several decades, would become known to a group of devoted followers, and then the world under the nom de guerre of Ata Ullah Abu Ammar Al Jununi.

Very little is known of his early life. The boy who would be Ata Ullah was sent to Saudi Arabia for education and employment. Going back over half a century, there have always been many Saudi patrons for displaced Rohingya refugees.
A commander of delicate tastes
Young Ata learned and worked. As he reached adulthood, he found employment with a mosque on Highway 40, the 1,359km long tract of road that traversed the vast Arabian Peninsula and connected Jeddah to Riyadh via Makkah. Ata had grown up to be a well-spoken Muslim scholar who was equally liked by his peers and superiors. He would regularly take part in Rohingya community meetings, where his eloquence won him admiration and attention.

The Saudi sheikh, who was the patron of the mosque, paid Ata 3000 Saudi Riyals per month. His time in Saudi Arabia taught him to enjoy the comforts of life, something that would certainly not be possible within the confines of the refugee camp.

According to some of his confidants in the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), Ata Ullah exhibited many of these traits as a result of interactions with many Saudi sheikhs.

While Ata Ullah wore a traditional Saudi “thobe” (a Saudi cloak for men which covers their entire bodies to the ankles) and a “keffiyeh” (Saudi men’s checkered headscarf) during his life in the peninsula, he began to dress in military fatigues after beginning the insurgency operations in Rakhine.
Man or myth?
One of the most interesting aspects of Ata Ullah is that even after he became a major figure in the volatile region of Rakhine, there was nothing concrete about his emergence. When did he return to Myanmar? Was he a visitor trying to see the land of his fathers, or a rebel commander reconnoitering the battleground? Nothing is known for certain.

So far there have been three distinct accounts: two hotly supported by the Rohingya people and the ARSA members; the third disputed by the Rohingya community in Saudi Arabia.

Some say Ata Ullah visited Rakhine immediately after the June 2012 communal violence that left at least 150 dead and relocated an estimated 100,000 Rohingyas. But no eyewitnesses have been found to corroborate this claim.

Others say he set foot in Rakhine in late 2013 to begin recruitment for Harakah al-Yaqin (HaY).

Rohingyas living in Saudi Arabia say they had seen Ata Ullah working in the mosque as recently as 2015, when he returned to Pakistan before retracing his family’s footsteps to Kashmir, India and Bangladesh, finally entering Myanmar in 2016.

One of the Rohingyas who had been living in Saudi Arabia for 15 years said the Rohingya community in Saudi Arabia knew of his visit to Pakistan and then to Myanmar.

“He went to Rakhine only a few months before the attack on Myanmar border police in October 2016,” the Saudi-resident Rohingya said.

ARSA refused to shed light on Ata Ullah’s first visit to Rakhine.

Ata Ullah was first seen worldwide when ARSA released a video in October 2016 after the attack on Myanmar’s border outposts. Since then, he has been issuing instructions and statements via encrypted social media messaging apps.

Vengeful Rohingyas flocked to the Harakah al-Yaqin (HaY) banner after the 2012 riots. HaY, which would become ARSA in 2017, was comprised of seething, angry young men whose lives had been destroyed by the Myanmar armed forces. A precursor group, the Rohingya Solidarity Organisation (RSO), had many members in its heydays, but it never pulled off any operations. The young and old alike found themselves in awe of HaY, and its charming commander, Ata Ullah.
What man inspires others to fight, to die?
Very few foot soldiers and recruiters have seen Ata Ullah in person. Only four ARSA members and 10 civilians are confirmed to have seen Ata; the rest have only heard stories. These stories that surround Ata Ullah are crucial to understand the Rohingya perception of the insurgency and how ARSA operates.

The Rohingyas had never had an outspoken leader stand up for them. No major figures have been of note in the time since they have been refugees. Until Ata Ullah.

He did not ask that they follow him; rather, he led and they followed. The throngs of trained Rohingya men who sought purpose found in him a guide. Ata Ullah, with his eloquent speeches refined with years of scholarly discussions in Saudi Arabia, was mesmeric for the awed crowd.

In one of his more famous recordings, Ata Ullah said: “I am here only to return to you your rights as Rohingya. The rights which nobody else could. You have seen the evidence of what we can do. Help us and listen to us.”

But it was not bloodless. Actions warranted more faith than words. Ata Ullah’s HaY cracked down on Rohingya informants of the government. At least 10 informants were killed by HaY between 2015-2016. The bloodshed gave him legitimacy to the people.

The October 2016 attack established him as an authority. People saw him travelling from one village to another on a motorbike, heralded by armed scouts who would clear the routes of Myanmar threats. People went to him for arbitration in all matters. Ata Ullah banned people from paying taxes and bribes to the Myanmar authorities, a decisive move to assert his authority over his people.

But the master stroke was when he called for all Rohingyas to refrain from dealing drugs, in particular yaba. The notorious yaba trade on the Bangladesh-Myanmar border had painted the Rohingyas as a fringe group which could only survive by selling drugs.

Ata Ullah’s command aimed to change that image. He appealed to their piety, asking that they “do only that which Allah has permitted, and nothing else.”

People responded earnestly, but the yaba trade had too many trapped in its web for the whole ethnic group to escape its clutches.

Ata Ullah proved to be a smart administrator, installing deputies and putting them in charge of regions while he became a phantom – seldom seen, but always heard of.

His directives are issued after cross-checking with the Quran and the Hadith, to ensure it can be used as a driving force in any argument. Many clerics would use the Friday prayer to appeal to the devotees in the mosques to spread his message – be loyal and be supportive.

ARSA foot soldiers and Rohingya clerics look at him with awe, because of his perspective on a unified Rohingya people.
A paragon of politeness
His confidants in ARSA, his devoted followers among the Rohingya, and his acquaintances from Saudi Arabia all unanimously describe Ata Ullah as one of the politest and softest-spoken people they have ever known.

“We have never heard him shout or rebuke any of the soldiers,” said an ARSA member.

“He treats every one of us like we are brothers, with his right hand over his chest and head slightly bowed in a show of reverence.”

How did a softly-spoken Islamic scholar living a cozy life in Saudi Arabia become a fulcrum for one of the largest refugee crisis in the 21st century?

Even the Islamic State’s leader, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, was an Islamic scholar who was rocketed to the top of the group after the death of his predecessor Abu Omar Al-Baghdadi.
http://www.dhakatribune.com/world/south-asia/2017/10/20/ata-ullah-man-heart-myanmar-conflict/
 
An anatomy of ARSA – behind the masks and guns
Adil Sakhawat
Published at 11:56 PM October 20, 2017
Last updated at 12:00 AM October 21, 2017
Adil_Sakhawat-ARSA-Guys-Territory-3-690x450.jpg

This Myanmar border police outpost at Shilkhali-kurkhali in the southern Maungdaw district was attacked by ARSA insurgents on August 25 ADIL SAKHAWAT
This is the fourth in a five-part series on the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army for which Dhaka Tribune’s Adil Sakhawat interviewed almost 20 ARSA members, including top leaders of the organisation
Ever since the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) made themselves known, there has been a race to gauge exactly how strong their numbers are. The successful attacks on multiple outposts and camps showed they had the widespread capacity to carry out coordinated strikes. The fact that the Myanmar army still avoids some areas in Rakhine means ARSA has enough guerillas to retain their strongholds.
Command structure
ARSA uses a five-layer leadership structure to relay its order to the troops. After talking to numerous Rohingya refugees, ARSA fighters and commanders, the Dhaka Tribune has learned that in every Rohingya village, there are at least 15-20 trained ARSA foot soldiers.

Every village is under the jurisdiction of a “jimmadar” (village commander/recruiter). The Jimmadar leads a team of around 20 members. The Jimmadars are usually selected from scholars or clerics for their reasoning skills and eloquent speech.

In Maungdaw, there are 105 jimmadars, who answer to 20 senior jimmadars who supervise the whole township. The 20 seniors then answer to six commanders: Master Khaled, Mufti Jiyabur Rahman, Marwan, Nurul Alam alias Azad, Maulvi Abu Bakar and Maulvi Mofiz.

Nurul Alam has been arrested by Bangladesh Police. Marwan left ARSA a while ago, and Mufti Jiyabur was injured in an explosion, according to several ARSA soldiers.

The entire operation in Maungdaw is overseen by Master Hashem who is Ata Ullah Abu Ammar Al Jununi’s right-hand man.

In Buthidaung, there are 20 senior jimmadars. The number of villages in the township could not be ascertained.

No information could be obtained about the ARSA operations in Rathedaung township.

The Dhaka Tribune has learned that some of the senior jimmadars in Maungdaw are also affiliated with the splinter insurgency called Tiger Group, which is noted for carrying out high-risk, high-value operations in Rakhine.

Although many ARSA troops refused to acknowledge the Tiger Group, several survivors of the attack on August 25 have identified many of the deceased in the shootout as their former comrades.
A tight-lipped commander
The Dhaka Tribune spoke to Master Hashem on September 24 via an encrypted phone call using a messaging app. He said no member of ARSA has been given authorisation to speak to the media or anyone else.

He refused to disclose anything about ARSA, but said the ARSA guerillas in Rakhine are in good condition.

He said: “We are good, Alhamdulillah. Hope you are well. We do not have any good internet connection here. Our Amir [Ata Ullah] and fighters are not in a position to speak to the media, so we unfortunately cannot talk to you. Our statements are being issued by expatriate jimmadars. Please contact them for any queries. Goodbye.”
Where does ARSA get the money for their operations?
The Dhaka Tribune investigation found that the majority of funding for ARSA comes from the Rohingya living in Saudi Arabia and Malaysia. There is also some contribution from other Middle Eastern countries with a small Rohingya presence.

The Dhaka Tribune has obtained a list of 80 Rohingya financers living in Saudi Arabia. The list was authenticated by one of the top commanders of ARSA. When contacted, most of the names refused to speak.

One of them, a cleric in Saudi Arabia, said he has recently sent 10,000 Saudi Riyals to ARSA. He said he felt proud when Ata Ullah sent him a voice message confirming receipt of his donation and thanking him for his contribution to the cause.

He said he felt moved to support ARSA as they are the first to take a stance against the oppressive Myanmar.

“Maybe they will not be successful this time. But I will pray for their success. If not now, then later. Freedom does not come in just a month,” he told the Dhaka Tribune.

After the August attack, ARSA received a huge amount of donation from people who were impressed with their capabilities. Audio recordings by Ata Ullah to these donors have been obtained by the Dhaka Tribune.

In the audio tape, Ata Ullah said: “Assalamualaikum. I, Abu Ammar Jununi, present myself in front of my community. First, I am grateful to Allah and want to thank my community for their support. I speak to you now because many of you want to help. Many of you think you have to talk to me directly to help me, that is not the case.

“We now wield blood and fire in our hands. It is not possible for me to speak to each and every one of you. So, I have handpicked men who will speak on my behalf and receive any contributions you make to our cause. Jimmadar Abul Kalam Haidery in Saudi Arabia and Maulvi Noman in Malaysia will be waiting for your help.”
Training in the dark
ARSA trains its foot soldiers in small, intensive sessions from 11pm to 1am or 2am. The training usually takes place near shrimp farms or in the forested hills.

Training is divided in two sessions – armed and unarmed.

Unarmed training involves martial arts, usually kung-fu and physical exercise involving calisthenics.

Armed training ranges from using firearms to preparing explosives – improvised explosive devices to be more precise.

The IEDs used by ARSA are made with urea, potassium chlorate, iron pipes as the container and metallic balls as shrapnel. The IEDs have an effective range of 45-90 metres.
The weapons they use
The video footage of ARSA training sessions showed they have very few weapons. Their firearms mostly comprise a few M-16 rifles, AK-47, G3 and G4 assault rifles.

Very few ARSA troops were carrying firearms during the October 2016 and the August 2017 attacks.

The October attack on the Myanmar Border Guard Police outpost gave them access to a huge cache of weapons – 61 assault rifles and 2,200 rounds of ammunition.

The August attacks on 25 police stations and army bases were not as successful, limiting their armed capability for the time being.

Those who do not have firearms use staves, swords, or other melee weapons.
The insurgent’s uniform
ARSA does not have any specific dress code, said the ARSA members. But all of the ARSA fighters usually wear three quarters and T-shirts during their training and operations. They also wear anklets or long socks on the feet and anklets also on the elbows.

Local supporters who also took part in ARSA’s operation are seen or heard to wear the normal Rohingya dresses which is lungi and T-shirt.
http://www.dhakatribune.com/world/south-asia/2017/10/20/anatomy-arsa-behind-masks-guns/

The insurgent splinter cells in Rakhine
Adil Sakhawat
Published at 12:14 AM October 21, 2017
Last updated at 01:02 AM October 21, 2017
Adil_Sakhawat-ARSA-Guys-Territory-5-690x450.jpg

Photo:ADIL SAKHAWAT
The Dhaka Tribune, during interviews with ARSA commanders and troops, has learned that the group is not an external entity, but rather another Rohingya group with the same objectives, but entirely different structure
The Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) is not the only insurgent group roaming the hills and jungles of Rakhine. Video footage of another armed group, but with black masks have surfaced several times, raising concerns.

The Dhaka Tribune, during interviews with ARSA commanders and troops, has learned that the group is not an external entity, but rather another Rohingya group with the same objectives, but entirely different structure.

According to several ARSA men: “They call themselves Tiger Group. Many of them were with ARSA previously. They are well-trained in hand-to-hand combat, melee weapons like staves and swords, and assault rifles and improvised explosives.”

But some other ARSA members from Southern Maungdaw have confided that Tiger Group is not formed with former ARSA members, but comprised of the elite members of ARSA to carry out high-risk, high-value operations. The signature black masks are an attempt to conceal their identities.

However, ARSA members from Northern Maungdaw claim Tiger Group is not affiliated with ARSA.

Tiger Group is renowned for its ruthless treatment of government informants. If they identify an informant in a village, first they thrash him in public as a warning. If the informant continues providing information to government forces, they return and execute him.

“It did not matter who the informant was. The same treatment was reserved for Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists when they betrayed the community,” an ARSA member said.

The execution of traitors to the community endeared the bold, black-masked group to the Rohingya.

But all of them vehemently denied any mass execution of Hindus and Buddhists, a claim raised by the Myanmar government upon discovery of a “mass grave.”

Tiger Group is not the only splinter group with a distinct identity. There is the Arakan Mujahedeen and Rashed Group, both formed in 2014.

Among ARSA, many have expressed scepticism about whether they are different groups or compartmentalised ARSA groups who follow a different command structure.

The Dhaka Tribune could not find anyone who knew about the Arakan Mujahedeen, but found plenty about Rashed Group.
Rashed Group – the splinter cell led by ARSA chief’s brother
The eponymous Rashed is reportedly a brother or cousin to ARSA chief Ata Ullah. Rohingya civilians and ARSA members have confirmed he too came from Saudi Arabia.

Rashed followed in the footsteps of Ata Ullah, but failed to garner as much support and success. After assembling the armed, masked group, Rashed returned to Saudi Arabia, where he currently resides, according to Rohingya in Saudi Arabia and in Cox’s Bazar refugee camps.

The group had been training for more than two years, and has been deployed recently.

According to the testimony of high-level ARSA regional commanders, all three groups coordinated with ARSA for the August 2017 attack.
http://www.dhakatribune.com/world/south-asia/2017/10/21/insurgent-splinter-cells-rakhine/
 
Exclusive: ARSA open to surrender, but only under UN supervision
Adil Sakhawat
Published at 10:55 PM October 21, 2017
Last updated at 10:12 AM October 22, 2017
ARSA-1-690x450.jpg

ARSA Chief Commander Ata Ullah, surrounded by members of the group, in this recently disclosed photo COLLECTED
This is the final part of the five-part series on the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) for which Dhaka Tribune’s Adil Sakhawat interviewed almost 20 ARSA members. The series has scrutinised the emergence, leadership and structure of the insurgency, and its goals
It has been nearly two months, 57 days to be precise, since the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) attacked Myanmar armed forces outposts, igniting the biggest humanitarian crisis in the region in decades. Nearly 590,000 refugees have fled to Bangladesh after the government forces began massacring village after village.

While refugees keep pouring into Bangladesh, ARSA has gone quiet. When they first appeared as Haraqah al-Yaqin in October 2016, the same scenario played out. A well-coordinated attack on Myanmar police camps put them on the map, but no other known operations took place till August 2017.

ARSA chief Ata Ullah Abu Ammar Al Jununi remains on the run with his guerillas in the hills and forests of Rakhine, which prevents him from communicating to direct queries.

In his lieu, there are four deputies who are empowered to speak on his behalf and operate as they see fit per Ata Ullah’s orders.

Maulvi Mostakim and Maulvi Noman coordinate recruitment and financing from Malaysia, Abul Kalam Haidery operates in Saudi Arabia and Abu Abdul Wahed works out of Thailand.

The Dhaka Tribune reached out directly to each of the four lynchpins, but only Abu Abdul Wahed relented to the interview.

He said: “How long must we remain silent? For over 70 years, the Burmese have been oppressing us. Until we fight back, this culture of oppression will not end. We will keep fighting till the global community forces Myanmar to ensure our civil and human rights.

“We have never been considered citizens, always marginalised and ignored. The only attention we ever received was when they came to ruin our lives,” Abu Abdul continued.

He said just as the whole world is keeping an eye on the Rohingya issue in Myanmar, they too are looking at the global leaders’ stance on the matter, assessing how much favour they have, in order to make a move. It appears that ARSA lit a spark, and is waiting for the world to sustain it or put it out altogether.

Abu Abdul vowed that ARSA will see the matter to the end, in particular what role the global community plays in pressuring Myanmar to negotiate.
Surrender is always on the table
The ARSA deputy says they are always ready to surrender, but only under their terms and conditions.

Firstly, Myanmar government has to ensure a safe zone for Rohingyas in Rakhine, policed by UN peacekeepers. Only when UN peacekeepers are actively ensuring the security, ARSA will lay down its arms.

“If the world fails us and does not respond to the cries of help from the Rohingya community, then we will keep fighting. We will not let a single Myanmar soldier sleep in peace.

“There is no point for us to fight if we are given the chance to live like any other ethnic groups in the country. This fight is out of desperation, this was never our first choice,” Abu Abdul explained.

When asked about the hundreds of thousands of Rohingyas fleeing to Bangladesh, and how it affects their operational capabilities, he replied: “The Myanmar army is strong, they are many, but we are not afraid to die. We will fight until our last breath. Our people led a life of enslavement and misery. Many of our people have fled, but that does not mean ARSA is dead.”
How the Kofi Annan Commission report fell apart

On August 24, Rakhine Commission led by former secretary general Kofi Annan submitted its final report including recommendations for resolving the brewing Rohingya crisis.

ARSA carried out its attacks that very night. Many have pointed out it was a blatant disregard for the commission’s attempts to implement peace. After the attack, the Myanmar government busied itself with retaliating and the report was pushed out of the picture.

When Abu Abdul was asked if that was ARSA’s stance, he firmly denied it, saying it was because the Myanmar government had been tipped off about their operations, forcing them to play their hand earlier than they preferred.

“Everyone is talking about how we attacked on August 24, but has anybody bothered to find out what life was like for every common Rohingya in Rathedaung from the first week of August? People were trapped inside their houses. Thousands of young men were arrested and driven away, never to be heard from again. Where are the questions about our missing young men?” he said.

He also said they gave the Myanmar government notice of their attack on Twitter right before the attack itself.
Rohingyas suffer, world ponders, ARSA watches
The Dhaka Tribune again reached out to several ARSA senior commanders over the past two days and was able to learn that the insurgent group has formally adopted the “wait-and-see” approach.

A senior commander who is in charge of communications said ARSA is working around the hour despite their silence.

He said ARSA has not carried out any operations recently so that the international community can get a chance to make things right.

“We are doing what needs to be done. But the world has to play its part too.”

When asked about the immense loss of life and the mass displacement of Rohingyas, his response was grim.

“To gain something, you have to lose something. We have been dying for 70 years. At least now the world is taking notice of our deaths!” he said.
Misappropriation of funds creates trust deficit
The Rohingya community in Saudi Arabia communicates with Abul Hasan Haidery for any and all ARSA-related matters. Lately, they have noticed a very noticeable change in Haidery’s daily life, which has raised eyebrows at the very least and caused several donors to reconsider future donations.

“After the October attack, he bought a brand new car, of the latest model. He moved to a posh neighbourhood and lives a very visible luxurious life. It bothers us to think, what is happening with ARSA,” said several Rohingyas living in Saudi Arabia who have contributed to ARSA’s war chest.

The Dhaka Tribune tried to contact Haidery several times to no avail. One of his aides responded afterwards and offered “financial reparations” for not being able to talk to the media. Furthermore, it has been learned that many among the community openly distrust Haidery, and do not invite him to major community meetings.
http://www.dhakatribune.com/world/s...exclusive-arsa-open-surrender-un-supervision/
 
For Rohingya women, ARSA is family and salvation
Adil Sakhawat
Published at 12:25 AM October 21, 2017
Last updated at 08:30 AM October 23, 2017
000_RV04T-690x432.jpg

Women and children fleeing violence in their villages arrive at the Yathae Taung township in Rakhine State in Myanmar on August 26, 2017 AFP
Almost every Rohingya woman firmly insisted that whereas the Myanmar army is notorious for rape and pillage, ARSA is cut from a different cloth
The Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) has been well-received by the Rohingya community for their fight against the oppressive Myanmar regime over their right to live.

What makes ARSA stand out is how they interact with the women.

The Dhaka Tribune discovered numerous female supporters of ARSA among the refugees arriving in Cox’s Bazar. Not many were abashed to speak out about their loyalties and explain the reasoning.

On one searing September day, a line of Rohingya were barely struggling to march towards Teknaf after disembarking from the boats. They looked haggard, their hands clutching the closest family member’s for a sense of security.

A woman tightly gripping the hands of two boys around 12-15 years old, paused in her tracks to speak.
She described the horror of having to flee her village in Maungdaw as the staccato of gunfire and deafening explosions to silence the terrified shrieks of the Rohingya.
The lines on her face became more and more pronounced with each atrocity described.

But when asked about the ARSA attack on the Myanmar outposts, her face steeled with resolve.
She stood straighter, a small hint of pride shone in the glint of her eyes.

“Only ARSA can bring peace to the Rohingya. They showed everyone last October and this year, that the Myanmar army cannot get away after everything they have done. We are not going to be treated like we do not matter,” she proclaimed.

She pointed at her two sons, saying: “I sent both of my sons to ARSA for training last year. They will go again, and help fight for our salvation.”

The proud mother of two ARSA guerillas-in-waiting added that whenever she met anyone from ARSA, they treated her with utmost respect.
The display of respect often moved her to cook for them and invite them over for food at her house.

Several other women corroborated her story, adding that they too have seen the firm politeness and respect in the attitude of the ARSA members.

“Our husbands are fighting for us, for our people. ARSA is not a stranger. ARSA is made up of people we know,” another Rohingya woman added.

Almost every Rohingya woman firmly insisted that whereas the Myanmar army is notorious for rape and pillage, ARSA is cut from a different cloth.

“Every night, we pray that our husbands and sons, fathers and brothers, win in their fight and come back to us safe and sound,” a woman said with tears in the corner of her eyes
http://www.dhakatribune.com/world/south-asia/2017/10/21/rohingya-women-arsa-family-salvation/
 

Back
Top Bottom